www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Last DMD made me truly breathless -- for the wrong reasons

reply Georg Wrede <georg.wrede nospam.org> writes:
My experiences last night


I've been doing production work in D for some six months now. Therefore 
I have been a bit reluctant to actually download the latest versions for 
testing, we've settled on 0.166 on Linux, and want to stay with it for 
some time past D 1.0.

Yesterday I couldn't resist, so I installed .174 on my w2k laptop -- and 
I was in for a major jolt:

Idly browsing dmd/bin I found that one of the exes actually had an icon. 
So I double-clicked it, and guess what, a simple wysiwyg GUI editor pops 
up! Wow, now we can make simple GUI apps right out of the box! And I 
found a small and nice text editor already configured for D there, too!

How come I've missed the buzz? Well, I guess D development is really 
putting on an exponential speed. Hoy contenders, resistance is futile!

Some research this morning revealed the day-after: I must have 
downloaded DFL in the spring and forgotten to erase the dm and dmd 
hierarchies before unzipping. Oh well, it's the small things, like always.


Some observations

While I actually believed I was using this "shrink-wrap-DMD", I had 
several different feelings about it:

  - wow, D is leaping forward -- where will we be in six months?!!
  - unfair to only provide GUI stuff for Windows
  - later it felt ok, since most D users are on Windows anyway
  - Walter's really out to impress the crap out of folks

After my bitter fall to ground, I felt:

  - why not?
  - some freebies in there make it feel polished, and "bigger"
  - ok, it's not Eclipse, but it could be touted as "a largish example"
  - OTOH, it must be awkward for Digital Mars:
     - quality issues
     - rights issues
     - the hassle, maintenance, support...
     - uncertainty about continued support from the app authors
     - upgrades syncing, especially waiting for the apps to catch up!
     - fighting with folks about who's stuff to include


Things learned

Obviously Walter can't be burdened with all this. So, what's left?
IMHO, we could re-examine the idea about there being "D distros".

We could have a few distros, each trying to be more user friendly, more 
outa-the-zip usable, and later distros for specific things, like games 
development, office stuff development, systems stuff, etc. If Linux 
seems to prosper with it, then I see no reason why D couldn't.

The DMD license could deny charging for such distros. At the same time 
the text would recommend contacting DM, "for very reasonable deals" on 
for-profit distribution, including book-sleeve CDs.

This way Walter could concentrate on exactly what he's doing right now, 
and what he's better at than anybody else: rocketing D to places where 
no language has gone!
Nov 15 2006
next sibling parent reply Charlie <charlies nowhere.com> writes:
I like this idea, not only because the competition between distros will 
keep people trying to make the most user friendly DMD distribution, but 
also because its just plain fun.  We want people to get excited about 
using D , and not just because it can be more productive.

And like you said it removes some of the burden from Walter.  I can 
already think of a handful of distros that Id like to try!

Georg Wrede wrote:

 My experiences last night
Nov 15 2006
parent Charlie <charlies nowhere.com> writes:
It's also a potentially large money maker for Digital Mars ( which for 
the community means continued D development! ) , look how well red-hat 
has done selling a free operating system.


Charlie wrote:

 
 I like this idea, not only because the competition between distros will 
 keep people trying to make the most user friendly DMD distribution, but 
 also because its just plain fun.  We want people to get excited about 
 using D , and not just because it can be more productive.
 
 And like you said it removes some of the burden from Walter.  I can 
 already think of a handful of distros that Id like to try!
 
 Georg Wrede wrote:

 My experiences last night
Nov 15 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent reply =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
Georg Wrede wrote:


 We could have a few distros, each trying to be more user friendly,
 more outa-the-zip usable, and later distros for specific things, like
 games development, office stuff development, systems stuff, etc. If
 Linux seems to prosper with it, then I see no reason why D couldn't.


Linux is Free Software under the GPL, though ? Then again, so is GDC...
I think that a D "distro" is a great idea, but would prefer GNU GPL+FDL.


 The DMD license could deny charging for such distros. At the same time 
 the text would recommend contacting DM, "for very reasonable deals" on 
 for-profit distribution, including book-sleeve CDs.


AFAIK, the DM license forbids all re-distribution of the DMD software ?
So if I made a friendly installer for DMC/DMD, I couldn't distribute it.

--anders
Nov 15 2006
next sibling parent reply Frits van Bommel <fvbommel REMwOVExCAPSs.nl> writes:
Anders F Björklund wrote:

 AFAIK, the DM license forbids all re-distribution of the DMD software ?
 So if I made a friendly installer for DMC/DMD, I couldn't distribute it.


Well, that just means your installer can't contain DMC/DMD. It means 
mean you'd have to create an installer that just gets it from 
ftp.digitalmars.com every time someone needs it. (though this'll likely 
be slower than an all-in-one package :( )
But I'd guess an installer containing (up-to-date) GDC plus the popular 
libraries would likely be nice too.

It shouldn't even be too hard to hack something up using DSSS + a script 
or even GUI...
This, of course, assumes DSSS works the way I think it does, I haven't 
tried it yet.
Nov 15 2006
parent Frits van Bommel <fvbommel REMwOVExCAPSs.nl> writes:
Frits van Bommel wrote:

 It shouldn't even be too hard to hack something up using DSSS + a script 
 or even GUI...
 This, of course, assumes DSSS works the way I think it does, I haven't 
 tried it yet.


Of course, the next post I read is someone having already suggested this :).
Nov 15 2006
prev sibling parent reply Georg Wrede <georg.wrede nospam.org> writes:
Anders F Björklund wrote:

 Georg Wrede wrote:
 

 We could have a few distros, each trying to be more user friendly,
 more outa-the-zip usable, and later distros for specific things, like
 games development, office stuff development, systems stuff, etc. If
 Linux seems to prosper with it, then I see no reason why D couldn't.




With Linux (and Unix and BSD and Mac), the distros I'm talking about 
should of course adhere to existing standards. That is, be packaged as 
.rpm files (for RedHat) and whatever else is customary on the other 
'nixes. This is obvious.

On Windows, I believe the distros should essentially be self installing 
packages. Whether they are created with Install Shield or hand-made, 
that is mainly the distro creator's head ache. The customer really cares 
only about ease and reliability. The most primitive distros could simply 
be .zip archives that contain a .bat file that the readme tells you to 
run once.


 Linux is Free Software under the GPL, though ? Then again, so is GDC...
 I think that a D "distro" is a great idea, but would prefer GNU GPL+FDL.


Of course that would be the cleanest alternative. And no doubt, if ever 
this distro thing gets off ground, surely there will be at least one 
that combines GDC with a bunch of GPL+FDL stuff only.


 The DMD license could deny charging for such distros. At the same time 
 the text would recommend contacting DM, "for very reasonable deals" on 
 for-profit distribution, including book-sleeve CDs.


 
 AFAIK, the DM license forbids all re-distribution of the DMD software ?
 So if I made a friendly installer for DMC/DMD, I couldn't distribute it.


The point of my post was to encourage Walter to slightly adjust this 
single aspect of the DM license, for this very purpose.

If that gets done, then we'd have a Darwinian forest of D-distros, the 
best of which would survive. Not to mention the variety and buzz and 
controversy between them, all of which would ultimately help spread the 
word about D's existence in the first place.

     Think about it: D development has become almost exponential.
     At the same time, the current "distro", as seen from end-user
     perspective, is exactly the same as the one you got 4 years
     ago. Really. What if we got this distro development speed to
     match that of D itself? For comparison, imagine D a year ago
     and compare with today. Then imagine the current "D distro"
     and imagine one year from now, with the same speed of
     development. "You aint seen nothin yet" _should_ be the
     motto here.

Even if some distro is plain crap, it wouldn't harm D's (or DM's or 
DMD's, or the community's) public image, folks would simply dump it and 
find a better one. This is no big deal, it happens in the consumer 
market all the time, and even when we are at the TV remote control, or 
when we choose what to eat this time.

The following paragraph:


 The DMD license could deny charging for such distros. At the same time the
text would recommend contacting DM, "for very reasonable deals" on for-profit
distribution, including book-sleeve CDs. 


was there to show how this can be done without losing credibility 
amongst the potential for-profit parties. I honestly don't expect DM to 
make any money from repackaging licenses, but the statement obviously 
still has to be there. (I don't expect DM to make revenue directly with 
DMD any other way either. In a world of free as beer compilers, I just 
don't think so. Any money Walter makes from D will probably be indirect, 
like consultation, paid articles, programming, seminars, books, etc.)

Against this background, it suddenly doesn't seem like such a far 
fetched idea to let indie distros flourish.

---

But there's another alternative too:

Walter might license some individuals directly.
Nov 16 2006
parent reply =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
Georg Wrede wrote:


 With Linux (and Unix and BSD and Mac), the distros I'm talking about 
 should of course adhere to existing standards. That is, be packaged as 
 ..rpm files (for RedHat) and whatever else is customary on the other 
 'nixes. This is obvious.


We have RPMs for RedHat/Fedora, DEBs for Debian/Ubuntu, an ebuild for
Gentoo, and I think there is a port for FreeBSD somewhere as well...

They will even handle installing the old "compat" libstdc++.so it needs,
upgrade the configuration and handle upgrades + all such other niceties.


 On Windows, I believe the distros should essentially be self installing 
 packages. Whether they are created with Install Shield or hand-made, 
 that is mainly the distro creator's head ache. The customer really cares 
 only about ease and reliability.


I think the Nullsoft installer system (NSIS) is great, and recommend it.
It's easy to use, open source, and creates low overhead installers EXEs.

For Mac OS X one can use the built-in Installer.app and create similar
installer PKGs, even if it is not as good as the Linux package managers.


 The most primitive distros could simply 
 be .zip archives that contain a .bat file that the readme tells you to 
 run once.


That would be the Digital Mars distribution then. Well, minus .bat ;-)
Unfortunately the .tgz version, with UNIX linefeeds, is still missing...

For the add-on libraries, it looks like DSSS could be a good thing -
I only need to get the new GDC, the new Bud and DSSS all packaged up.


 Of course that would be the cleanest alternative. And no doubt, if ever 
 this distro thing gets off ground, surely there will be at least one 
 that combines GDC with a bunch of GPL+FDL stuff only.


There are two such GDC "distros", for Mac and Win, maybe one for Linux.
But there isn't very much bundled except the D compiler at the moment.

Future releases will feature more import modules and more documentation,
this is something that has been planned all along. Just not completed.


 AFAIK, the DM license forbids all re-distribution of the DMD software ?
 So if I made a friendly installer for DMC/DMD, I couldn't distribute it.


 
 The point of my post was to encourage Walter to slightly adjust this 
 single aspect of the DM license, for this very purpose.


There are ready-made installer templates, if Walter wants to use them ?
(I know that I have "donated" a specfile for RPM and a script for NSIS)
So there are no technical reasons why there aren't any DMD installers ?
It's just that Walter prefers the archives, and distributing it himself.

If the DMD compiler and D specification were re-distributable, then we 
could help out. But since they're not, we can only wait until they are ?
It's not that it is *hard* to go to ftp.digitalmars.com for DMD or to 
www.digitalmars.com for D, but it cannot be compared with being Free...

--anders
Nov 16 2006
next sibling parent reply Sean Kelly <sean f4.ca> writes:
Anders F Björklund wrote:

 
 I think the Nullsoft installer system (NSIS) is great, and recommend it.
 It's easy to use, open source, and creates low overhead installers EXEs.


I gave this a glance yesterday and it looks great.  Must better than 
Installshield for the average case.


Sean
Nov 16 2006
parent reply Bill Baxter <wbaxter gmail.com> writes:
Sean Kelly wrote:

 Anders F Björklund wrote:
 

 I think the Nullsoft installer system (NSIS) is great, and recommend it.
 It's easy to use, open source, and creates low overhead installers EXEs.


 
 
 I gave this a glance yesterday and it looks great.  Must better than 
 Installshield for the average case.


My 2 cents is that InnoSetup is the best for simple cases where you 
don't need much custom logic, you're just installing some files, and 
maybe setting a few environment variables.

NSIS is best if you need very specialized custom behavior like an 
internet-aware installer or something like that.  But it's a more 
complicated than InnoSetup to use for the simple cases.  For instance 
With NSIS, you have to provide a list of all files to install, *and* all 
files to uninstall (even though they are usually pretty much the same). 
  NSIS's way is more general, but more tedious.

--bb
Nov 16 2006
next sibling parent Charlie <charlies nowhere.com> writes:
I'm all for InnoSetup too , with its pascal type scripting language its 
also capable of some pretty complicated installs, if you need it.

Theres also form designers for InnoSetup ( free ! ) , and other fun 
plugins as well.

Charlie

Bill Baxter wrote:

 Sean Kelly wrote:

 Anders F Björklund wrote:


 I think the Nullsoft installer system (NSIS) is great, and recommend it.
 It's easy to use, open source, and creates low overhead installers EXEs.



 I gave this a glance yesterday and it looks great.  Must better than 
 Installshield for the average case.


 
 My 2 cents is that InnoSetup is the best for simple cases where you 
 don't need much custom logic, you're just installing some files, and 
 maybe setting a few environment variables.
 
 NSIS is best if you need very specialized custom behavior like an 
 internet-aware installer or something like that.  But it's a more 
 complicated than InnoSetup to use for the simple cases.  For instance 
 With NSIS, you have to provide a list of all files to install, *and* all 
 files to uninstall (even though they are usually pretty much the same). 
  NSIS's way is more general, but more tedious.
 
 --bb
Nov 16 2006
prev sibling next sibling parent =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
Bill Baxter wrote:


 My 2 cents is that InnoSetup is the best [...]
 NSIS's way is more general, but more tedious.


It's tedious alright, but it is also simple to
generate with wizards or programs and to edit ?

A cool thing about MinGW32 and NSIS is that they
do not require a Windows OS in order to build...
And last time I looked at InnoSetup, the overhead
was like ten times the size of the NSIS overhead.

--anders
Nov 16 2006
prev sibling parent reply Georg Wrede <georg.wrede nospam.org> writes:
Bill Baxter wrote:

 NSIS is best if you need very specialized custom behavior like an 
 internet-aware installer or something like that.


Well, that would be perfect for an installer that downloads DMD!

(Although I'd still ask for Walter's permission first.)

A distro that contains all except DMD itself would then be a viable 
alternative.
Nov 16 2006
parent reply Bill Baxter <wbaxter gmail.com> writes:
Georg Wrede wrote:

 Bill Baxter wrote:
 

 NSIS is best if you need very specialized custom behavior like an 
 internet-aware installer or something like that.


 
 
 Well, that would be perfect for an installer that downloads DMD!
 
 (Although I'd still ask for Walter's permission first.)
 
 A distro that contains all except DMD itself would then be a viable 
 alternative.


Yeh, if it seems even remotely possible you'd like to go in that 
direction (an installer with a lot of smarts) then starting with NSIS 
makes sense.

Also I think Anders you are right about file sizes.  I do recall small 
sizes being a major point of NSIS.  I think the Innosetup installers 
basically include all the functionality InnoSetup is capable of, whether 
or not you are using it.  Whereas with NSIS, it only compiles in the 
features you're really using.

Yes you can do some automation, writing scripts to generate things like 
the file install and uninstall lists.  I wrote some Python scripts like 
that for my NSIS installer.  It's just extra work you have to do that 
isn't necssary with InnoSetup.

Not sure what platform issues there are.  I thought both Inno and NSIS 
were pretty solidly in the Windows only camp.

--bb
Nov 16 2006
parent =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Anders_F_Bj=F6rklund?= <afb algonet.se> writes:
Bill Baxter wrote:


 Not sure what platform issues there are.  I thought both Inno and NSIS 
 were pretty solidly in the Windows only camp.


I meant that I can use my Linux machine to make a Windows installer...

As for actually running the installer, then you are totally correct :-)

--anders
Nov 16 2006
prev sibling parent Georg Wrede <georg.wrede nospam.org> writes:
Anders F Björklund wrote:

 We have RPMs for RedHat/Fedora, DEBs for Debian/Ubuntu, an ebuild for
 Gentoo, and I think there is a port for FreeBSD somewhere as well...
 
 They will even handle installing the old "compat" libstdc++.so it needs,
 upgrade the configuration and handle upgrades + all such other niceties.


Excellent!!

We should figure out a way to get more publicity for them.

...


 There are two such GDC "distros", for Mac and Win, maybe one for Linux.
 But there isn't very much bundled except the D compiler at the moment.
 
 Future releases will feature more import modules and more documentation,
 this is something that has been planned all along. Just not completed.


A very good start!
Nov 16 2006
prev sibling parent reply Jesse Phillips <Jesse.K.Phillips+Digitalmars gmail.com> writes:
DSSS would make a good distro for dmd/build. May not be feasible now,
but some day.

Georg Wrede wrote:

 My experiences last night
 
 
 I've been doing production work in D for some six months now. Therefore
 I have been a bit reluctant to actually download the latest versions for
 testing, we've settled on 0.166 on Linux, and want to stay with it for
 some time past D 1.0.
 
 Yesterday I couldn't resist, so I installed .174 on my w2k laptop -- and
 I was in for a major jolt:
 
 Idly browsing dmd/bin I found that one of the exes actually had an icon.
 So I double-clicked it, and guess what, a simple wysiwyg GUI editor pops
 up! Wow, now we can make simple GUI apps right out of the box! And I
 found a small and nice text editor already configured for D there, too!
 
 How come I've missed the buzz? Well, I guess D development is really
 putting on an exponential speed. Hoy contenders, resistance is futile!
 
 Some research this morning revealed the day-after: I must have
 downloaded DFL in the spring and forgotten to erase the dm and dmd
 hierarchies before unzipping. Oh well, it's the small things, like always.
 
 
 Some observations
 
 While I actually believed I was using this "shrink-wrap-DMD", I had
 several different feelings about it:
 
  - wow, D is leaping forward -- where will we be in six months?!!
  - unfair to only provide GUI stuff for Windows
  - later it felt ok, since most D users are on Windows anyway
  - Walter's really out to impress the crap out of folks
 
 After my bitter fall to ground, I felt:
 
  - why not?
  - some freebies in there make it feel polished, and "bigger"
  - ok, it's not Eclipse, but it could be touted as "a largish example"
  - OTOH, it must be awkward for Digital Mars:
     - quality issues
     - rights issues
     - the hassle, maintenance, support...
     - uncertainty about continued support from the app authors
     - upgrades syncing, especially waiting for the apps to catch up!
     - fighting with folks about who's stuff to include
 
 
 Things learned
 
 Obviously Walter can't be burdened with all this. So, what's left?
 IMHO, we could re-examine the idea about there being "D distros".
 
 We could have a few distros, each trying to be more user friendly, more
 outa-the-zip usable, and later distros for specific things, like games
 development, office stuff development, systems stuff, etc. If Linux
 seems to prosper with it, then I see no reason why D couldn't.
 
 The DMD license could deny charging for such distros. At the same time
 the text would recommend contacting DM, "for very reasonable deals" on
 for-profit distribution, including book-sleeve CDs.
 
 This way Walter could concentrate on exactly what he's doing right now,
 and what he's better at than anybody else: rocketing D to places where
 no language has gone!
Nov 15 2006
next sibling parent reply Gregor Richards <Richards codu.org> writes:
Though it creates fanciful bootstrapping issues, it's certainly 
possible. If I added a 'dmd' package, one could download just DSSS (with 
no compiler at all), and it would run a script (presumably not written 
in D :) ) which would download and install DMD.

In fact, I've already done this for GDC (though it's mostly only useful 
for upgrading, as its script /is/ written in D)

  - Gregor Richards

Jesse Phillips wrote:

 DSSS would make a good distro for dmd/build. May not be feasible now,
 but some day.
 
 Georg Wrede wrote:
 

My experiences last night


I've been doing production work in D for some six months now. Therefore
I have been a bit reluctant to actually download the latest versions for
testing, we've settled on 0.166 on Linux, and want to stay with it for
some time past D 1.0.

Yesterday I couldn't resist, so I installed .174 on my w2k laptop -- and
I was in for a major jolt:

Idly browsing dmd/bin I found that one of the exes actually had an icon.
So I double-clicked it, and guess what, a simple wysiwyg GUI editor pops
up! Wow, now we can make simple GUI apps right out of the box! And I
found a small and nice text editor already configured for D there, too!

How come I've missed the buzz? Well, I guess D development is really
putting on an exponential speed. Hoy contenders, resistance is futile!

Some research this morning revealed the day-after: I must have
downloaded DFL in the spring and forgotten to erase the dm and dmd
hierarchies before unzipping. Oh well, it's the small things, like always.


Some observations

While I actually believed I was using this "shrink-wrap-DMD", I had
several different feelings about it:

 - wow, D is leaping forward -- where will we be in six months?!!
 - unfair to only provide GUI stuff for Windows
 - later it felt ok, since most D users are on Windows anyway
 - Walter's really out to impress the crap out of folks

After my bitter fall to ground, I felt:

 - why not?
 - some freebies in there make it feel polished, and "bigger"
 - ok, it's not Eclipse, but it could be touted as "a largish example"
 - OTOH, it must be awkward for Digital Mars:
    - quality issues
    - rights issues
    - the hassle, maintenance, support...
    - uncertainty about continued support from the app authors
    - upgrades syncing, especially waiting for the apps to catch up!
    - fighting with folks about who's stuff to include


Things learned

Obviously Walter can't be burdened with all this. So, what's left?
IMHO, we could re-examine the idea about there being "D distros".

We could have a few distros, each trying to be more user friendly, more
outa-the-zip usable, and later distros for specific things, like games
development, office stuff development, systems stuff, etc. If Linux
seems to prosper with it, then I see no reason why D couldn't.

The DMD license could deny charging for such distros. At the same time
the text would recommend contacting DM, "for very reasonable deals" on
for-profit distribution, including book-sleeve CDs.

This way Walter could concentrate on exactly what he's doing right now,
and what he's better at than anybody else: rocketing D to places where
no language has gone!
Nov 15 2006
parent Alexander Panek <a.panek brainsware.org> writes:
I've written a script for installing DMD on Linux. This could easily be 
adopted to either an executable file for Windows, or a batch script 
(though I think an executable file is less pain in the ass in this 
case.. :P).

Alex

Gregor Richards wrote:

 Though it creates fanciful bootstrapping issues, it's certainly 
 possible. If I added a 'dmd' package, one could download just DSSS (with 
 no compiler at all), and it would run a script (presumably not written 
 in D :) ) which would download and install DMD.
 
 In fact, I've already done this for GDC (though it's mostly only useful 
 for upgrading, as its script /is/ written in D)
 
  - Gregor Richards
 
 Jesse Phillips wrote:

 DSSS would make a good distro for dmd/build. May not be feasible now,
 but some day.

 Georg Wrede wrote:


 My experiences last night


 I've been doing production work in D for some six months now. Therefore
 I have been a bit reluctant to actually download the latest versions for
 testing, we've settled on 0.166 on Linux, and want to stay with it for
 some time past D 1.0.

 Yesterday I couldn't resist, so I installed .174 on my w2k laptop -- and
 I was in for a major jolt:

 Idly browsing dmd/bin I found that one of the exes actually had an icon.
 So I double-clicked it, and guess what, a simple wysiwyg GUI editor pops
 up! Wow, now we can make simple GUI apps right out of the box! And I
 found a small and nice text editor already configured for D there, too!

 How come I've missed the buzz? Well, I guess D development is really
 putting on an exponential speed. Hoy contenders, resistance is futile!

 Some research this morning revealed the day-after: I must have
 downloaded DFL in the spring and forgotten to erase the dm and dmd
 hierarchies before unzipping. Oh well, it's the small things, like 
 always.


 Some observations

 While I actually believed I was using this "shrink-wrap-DMD", I had
 several different feelings about it:

 - wow, D is leaping forward -- where will we be in six months?!!
 - unfair to only provide GUI stuff for Windows
 - later it felt ok, since most D users are on Windows anyway
 - Walter's really out to impress the crap out of folks

 After my bitter fall to ground, I felt:

 - why not?
 - some freebies in there make it feel polished, and "bigger"
 - ok, it's not Eclipse, but it could be touted as "a largish example"
 - OTOH, it must be awkward for Digital Mars:
    - quality issues
    - rights issues
    - the hassle, maintenance, support...
    - uncertainty about continued support from the app authors
    - upgrades syncing, especially waiting for the apps to catch up!
    - fighting with folks about who's stuff to include


 Things learned

 Obviously Walter can't be burdened with all this. So, what's left?
 IMHO, we could re-examine the idea about there being "D distros".

 We could have a few distros, each trying to be more user friendly, more
 outa-the-zip usable, and later distros for specific things, like games
 development, office stuff development, systems stuff, etc. If Linux
 seems to prosper with it, then I see no reason why D couldn't.

 The DMD license could deny charging for such distros. At the same time
 the text would recommend contacting DM, "for very reasonable deals" on
 for-profit distribution, including book-sleeve CDs.

 This way Walter could concentrate on exactly what he's doing right now,
 and what he's better at than anybody else: rocketing D to places where
 no language has gone!
Nov 15 2006
prev sibling parent reply Brad Roberts <braddr puremagic.com> writes:
While DSSS is a great product in the vein of cpan and its ilk and I don't 
want to diminish it's value, but for most unix flavors, there's native 
packaging mechanisms that are preferred by the masses.

Explicitly stated:
  for freebsd, ports is king
      debian, .deb's and the various front ends is where it's at
      redhat, .rpm and yum
      windows, uh... installshield?  I dunno.. not my playground
      etc...

My primary experience is with debian.  There there's wrappers around cpan 
to facilitate creation of .deb from a cpan package should it not happen to 
be already officially packaged up (an extreme rarity).  As a maintainer of 
more systems than I care to, I value the uniformity that using a single 
package management system brings.

So.. what would really go a long way, would be a way to easily create 
native package for various platforms and a repository to be populated.  
What would then work well would be for there to be a single 'starter' 
package for D development:  probably a dmd/gdc installer + a hook to 
register the native repository with the native install system (for debian 
this would be adding a line to the /etc/apt/sources.list file).

DSSS could then mutate to a system for building and producing the 
artifacts to go into the repository, maybe.

Anyway.. food for thought.

Later,
Brad

On Wed, 15 Nov 2006, Jesse Phillips wrote:


 Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 10:37:53 -0800
 From: Jesse Phillips <Jesse.K.Phillips+Digitalmars gmail.com>
 Reply-To: digitalmars.D <digitalmars-d puremagic.com>
 To: digitalmars-d puremagic.com
 Newsgroups: digitalmars.D
 Subject: Re: Last DMD made me truly breathless -- for the wrong reasons
 
 DSSS would make a good distro for dmd/build. May not be feasible now,
 but some day.
 
 Georg Wrede wrote:

 My experiences last night
 
 
 I've been doing production work in D for some six months now. Therefore
 I have been a bit reluctant to actually download the latest versions for
 testing, we've settled on 0.166 on Linux, and want to stay with it for
 some time past D 1.0.
 
 Yesterday I couldn't resist, so I installed .174 on my w2k laptop -- and
 I was in for a major jolt:
 
 Idly browsing dmd/bin I found that one of the exes actually had an icon.
 So I double-clicked it, and guess what, a simple wysiwyg GUI editor pops
 up! Wow, now we can make simple GUI apps right out of the box! And I
 found a small and nice text editor already configured for D there, too!
 
 How come I've missed the buzz? Well, I guess D development is really
 putting on an exponential speed. Hoy contenders, resistance is futile!
 
 Some research this morning revealed the day-after: I must have
 downloaded DFL in the spring and forgotten to erase the dm and dmd
 hierarchies before unzipping. Oh well, it's the small things, like always.
 
 
 Some observations
 
 While I actually believed I was using this "shrink-wrap-DMD", I had
 several different feelings about it:
 
  - wow, D is leaping forward -- where will we be in six months?!!
  - unfair to only provide GUI stuff for Windows
  - later it felt ok, since most D users are on Windows anyway
  - Walter's really out to impress the crap out of folks
 
 After my bitter fall to ground, I felt:
 
  - why not?
  - some freebies in there make it feel polished, and "bigger"
  - ok, it's not Eclipse, but it could be touted as "a largish example"
  - OTOH, it must be awkward for Digital Mars:
     - quality issues
     - rights issues
     - the hassle, maintenance, support...
     - uncertainty about continued support from the app authors
     - upgrades syncing, especially waiting for the apps to catch up!
     - fighting with folks about who's stuff to include
 
 
 Things learned
 
 Obviously Walter can't be burdened with all this. So, what's left?
 IMHO, we could re-examine the idea about there being "D distros".
 
 We could have a few distros, each trying to be more user friendly, more
 outa-the-zip usable, and later distros for specific things, like games
 development, office stuff development, systems stuff, etc. If Linux
 seems to prosper with it, then I see no reason why D couldn't.
 
 The DMD license could deny charging for such distros. At the same time
 the text would recommend contacting DM, "for very reasonable deals" on
 for-profit distribution, including book-sleeve CDs.
 
 This way Walter could concentrate on exactly what he's doing right now,
 and what he's better at than anybody else: rocketing D to places where
 no language has gone!
Nov 15 2006
parent reply Gregor Richards <Richards codu.org> writes:
Producing native packages from DSSS builds is already on "the list."

And DSSS provides a large number of advantages that aren't in native 
packages, simply because DSSS is tailored towards D.

I completely understand that issues with pervasiveness of different 
installation systems and platforms, it's the core of my current job, and 
I designed DSSS with the forethought that it would at least as often be 
used simply to force fairly consistent installs for packaging systems as 
it would be for its net feature.  I've been trying to stress that the 
net feature is /not/ its primary feature, but certain parties who shall 
remain nameless have pressured me into bringing that future to the 
forefront.

  - Gregor Richards

Brad Roberts wrote:

 While DSSS is a great product in the vein of cpan and its ilk and I don't 
 want to diminish it's value, but for most unix flavors, there's native 
 packaging mechanisms that are preferred by the masses.
 
 Explicitly stated:
   for freebsd, ports is king
       debian, .deb's and the various front ends is where it's at
       redhat, .rpm and yum
       windows, uh... installshield?  I dunno.. not my playground
       etc...
 
 My primary experience is with debian.  There there's wrappers around cpan 
 to facilitate creation of .deb from a cpan package should it not happen to 
 be already officially packaged up (an extreme rarity).  As a maintainer of 
 more systems than I care to, I value the uniformity that using a single 
 package management system brings.
 
 So.. what would really go a long way, would be a way to easily create 
 native package for various platforms and a repository to be populated.  
 What would then work well would be for there to be a single 'starter' 
 package for D development:  probably a dmd/gdc installer + a hook to 
 register the native repository with the native install system (for debian 
 this would be adding a line to the /etc/apt/sources.list file).
 
 DSSS could then mutate to a system for building and producing the 
 artifacts to go into the repository, maybe.
 
 Anyway.. food for thought.
 
 Later,
 Brad
 
 On Wed, 15 Nov 2006, Jesse Phillips wrote:
 
 

Date: Wed, 15 Nov 2006 10:37:53 -0800
From: Jesse Phillips <Jesse.K.Phillips+Digitalmars gmail.com>
Reply-To: digitalmars.D <digitalmars-d puremagic.com>
To: digitalmars-d puremagic.com
Newsgroups: digitalmars.D
Subject: Re: Last DMD made me truly breathless -- for the wrong reasons

DSSS would make a good distro for dmd/build. May not be feasible now,
but some day.

Georg Wrede wrote:


My experiences last night


I've been doing production work in D for some six months now. Therefore
I have been a bit reluctant to actually download the latest versions for
testing, we've settled on 0.166 on Linux, and want to stay with it for
some time past D 1.0.

Yesterday I couldn't resist, so I installed .174 on my w2k laptop -- and
I was in for a major jolt:

Idly browsing dmd/bin I found that one of the exes actually had an icon.
So I double-clicked it, and guess what, a simple wysiwyg GUI editor pops
up! Wow, now we can make simple GUI apps right out of the box! And I
found a small and nice text editor already configured for D there, too!

How come I've missed the buzz? Well, I guess D development is really
putting on an exponential speed. Hoy contenders, resistance is futile!

Some research this morning revealed the day-after: I must have
downloaded DFL in the spring and forgotten to erase the dm and dmd
hierarchies before unzipping. Oh well, it's the small things, like always.


Some observations

While I actually believed I was using this "shrink-wrap-DMD", I had
several different feelings about it:

 - wow, D is leaping forward -- where will we be in six months?!!
 - unfair to only provide GUI stuff for Windows
 - later it felt ok, since most D users are on Windows anyway
 - Walter's really out to impress the crap out of folks

After my bitter fall to ground, I felt:

 - why not?
 - some freebies in there make it feel polished, and "bigger"
 - ok, it's not Eclipse, but it could be touted as "a largish example"
 - OTOH, it must be awkward for Digital Mars:
    - quality issues
    - rights issues
    - the hassle, maintenance, support...
    - uncertainty about continued support from the app authors
    - upgrades syncing, especially waiting for the apps to catch up!
    - fighting with folks about who's stuff to include


Things learned

Obviously Walter can't be burdened with all this. So, what's left?
IMHO, we could re-examine the idea about there being "D distros".

We could have a few distros, each trying to be more user friendly, more
outa-the-zip usable, and later distros for specific things, like games
development, office stuff development, systems stuff, etc. If Linux
seems to prosper with it, then I see no reason why D couldn't.

The DMD license could deny charging for such distros. At the same time
the text would recommend contacting DM, "for very reasonable deals" on
for-profit distribution, including book-sleeve CDs.

This way Walter could concentrate on exactly what he's doing right now,
and what he's better at than anybody else: rocketing D to places where
no language has gone!
Nov 15 2006
next sibling parent Gregor Richards <Richards codu.org> writes:
BRING THE FUTURE TO THE FOREFRONT!!!

Tpyo. s/future/feature/

Gregor Richards wrote:

 remain nameless have pressured me into bringing that future to the
Nov 15 2006
prev sibling parent reply Sean Kelly <sean f4.ca> writes:
Gregor Richards wrote:

 Producing native packages from DSSS builds is already on "the list."
 
 And DSSS provides a large number of advantages that aren't in native 
 packages, simply because DSSS is tailored towards D.
 
 I completely understand that issues with pervasiveness of different 
 installation systems and platforms, it's the core of my current job, and 
 I designed DSSS with the forethought that it would at least as often be 
 used simply to force fairly consistent installs for packaging systems as 
 it would be for its net feature.  I've been trying to stress that the 
 net feature is /not/ its primary feature, but certain parties who shall 
 remain nameless have pressured me into bringing that future to the 
 forefront.


For what it's worth, Windows doesn't really have a package management 
feature like most other operating systems, so an automated version 
tracking/download system there would be a great asset, even if the final 
step was just to launch an installer app.  As for installers, 
Installshield is a fairly expensive piece of software, but there is a 
lightweight installer generator available from Microsoft:

http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/downloads/tools/vsi11/default.aspx

I haven't tried it yet so I can't comment on its quality, but you can't 
beat free.


Sean
Nov 15 2006
next sibling parent David Gileadi <foo bar.com> writes:
Sean Kelly wrote:

 Gregor Richards wrote:

 Producing native packages from DSSS builds is already on "the list."

 And DSSS provides a large number of advantages that aren't in native 
 packages, simply because DSSS is tailored towards D.

 I completely understand that issues with pervasiveness of different 
 installation systems and platforms, it's the core of my current job, 
 and I designed DSSS with the forethought that it would at least as 
 often be used simply to force fairly consistent installs for packaging 
 systems as it would be for its net feature.  I've been trying to 
 stress that the net feature is /not/ its primary feature, but certain 
 parties who shall remain nameless have pressured me into bringing that 
 future to the forefront.


 
 For what it's worth, Windows doesn't really have a package management 
 feature like most other operating systems, so an automated version 
 tracking/download system there would be a great asset, even if the final 
 step was just to launch an installer app.  As for installers, 
 Installshield is a fairly expensive piece of software, but there is a 
 lightweight installer generator available from Microsoft:
 
 http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/downloads/tools/vsi11/default.aspx
 
 I haven't tried it yet so I can't comment on its quality, but you can't 
 beat free.
 
 
 Sean


I haven't used Visual Studio Installer (the above link) but I have used 
the Nullsoft Scriptable Install System:

http://nsis.sourceforge.net/

It's also free and is quite nice to use.  Maybe not as supported as the 
Microsoft solution in the long term, though :P

-Dave
Nov 15 2006
prev sibling parent Alexander Panek <a.panek brainsware.org> writes:
/me votes for DSSS GUI + integrated installer (based on per package 
scripts coming with the package) \o/

Sean Kelly wrote:

 Gregor Richards wrote:

 Producing native packages from DSSS builds is already on "the list."

 And DSSS provides a large number of advantages that aren't in native 
 packages, simply because DSSS is tailored towards D.

 I completely understand that issues with pervasiveness of different 
 installation systems and platforms, it's the core of my current job, 
 and I designed DSSS with the forethought that it would at least as 
 often be used simply to force fairly consistent installs for packaging 
 systems as it would be for its net feature.  I've been trying to 
 stress that the net feature is /not/ its primary feature, but certain 
 parties who shall remain nameless have pressured me into bringing that 
 future to the forefront.


 
 For what it's worth, Windows doesn't really have a package management 
 feature like most other operating systems, so an automated version 
 tracking/download system there would be a great asset, even if the final 
 step was just to launch an installer app.  As for installers, 
 Installshield is a fairly expensive piece of software, but there is a 
 lightweight installer generator available from Microsoft:
 
 http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/downloads/tools/vsi11/default.aspx
 
 I haven't tried it yet so I can't comment on its quality, but you can't 
 beat free.
 
 
 Sean
Nov 15 2006